Author
Topic: Sigma 30mm f/1.4 or Canon 35mm f/2? (Read 17179 times)

Anyway, I've pretty much narrowed it down to the two lenses in the subject. Any opinions? Whichever one I choose, I'll be using it in situations that would require shooting wide open.

I was in the same position as you are now. My list also included the Sigma 28mm f1.8, a rather big, but also very cheap option. The Canon 28mm f1.8 fell out because its softness wide open, and it's price. Somehow price and IQ did not correspond. The Sigma 30mm f1.4 was also an option. The main frawback for my shooting style, would have been the rather large minimum focusing distance (I often can't focus my Canon 50mm f1.4, because I'm to close). So I went with the Canon 35mm f2. It is also not perfect, but you can't complain too much at this price point. I use it very often, and it is my walk-arround lens when I only like to carry a small package.

As expected it is not "very sharp" wide open but of-course your tolerance will vary. The focus ring is noisy and the focus tends to hunt a bit in low light. Also, compared to my other zoom lenses, in manual mode i have to turn the focus ring by a larger amount to acquire focus (not sure if this is the case with other cheaper lenses). Having said that i love the focal length on FF . If budget was not a constraint i would have gone for the 1.4L version.

I visited a Sigma dealer to try out the 30mm f/2 on my camera (7D but I also have a 40D). In a nutshell: I liked the quality of the photos very much WHEN THEY WERE SHARP. Sigma's AF struggles on Canon bodies -- it is OK-ish in bright light but can get really bad otherwise. With most Canon lenses, on peripheral AF sensors, when there's not so much light, at least on xxD / 7D -- it takes time and I need to press the AF-ON button a few times to get focus but I usually do get it. With Sigma, I feel it's worse, there's times when it never focuses correctly (it misses by a tiny bit but it is too much for my purposes, I need the lens to make photos of a newborn baby, eyes must be tack sharp)

I got the 35mm f/2 instead and I am very happy with it. I also very much like the close focusing distance -- again, very useful for newborn closeups.

AF on the 35mm f/2 is loud and not fast (not really slow, but slower than that of 85mm f/1.8 or 400mm f/5.6) but precise.

I really could use Sigma's extra 5mm width so I had also considered the 28mm f/1.8 but ultimately decided against it. I felt the 35mm f/2 had marginally better opinions but most of all, 35mm f/2 was half of the price of 28mm f/1.8 and 30mm f/1.4. This was the money I was willing to risk (and I am very happy with the results of this gamble).

I went through the same thing and got the Sigma from BH. First one had bad focusing and exchanged it, the second one is almost perfect (tested it out after several months for shits and giggles) and am very happy with the Sigma. I have a XSi with no AFMA BTW. It is great wide open for indoor situations, not as awesome as expected closed down or from distances but I have other lenses for those cases.

I have heard that the 35/2 is better for across the frame sharpness and long distance focusing but have no first hand experience with this lens. The 30/1.4 is sharp as crap in the center/midframe on a crop and I love it for what I wanted it for. Hope this helps.

Samyang 35mm f/1.4 maybe? Thing is about as sharp as the 35L at 1/3 of the price, although it doesn't have AF. The 35L has the edge wide open, but at f/2 or less the Samyang is right there with it at the center and easily has the better edges.